Regional Differences in Clinical Presentation and Prognosis of Patients With Post-Sustained Virologic Response Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Widespread use of direct-acting antivirals for hepatitis C virus infection has been paralleled with increased numbers of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) after achieving sustained virologic response (post-SVR HCC) worldwide. Few data compare regional differences in the presentation and prognosis of patients with post-SVR HCC. METHODS: We identified patients with advanced fibrosis (F3/F4) who developed incident post-SVR HCC between March 2015 and October 2021 from 30 sites in Europe, North America, South America, the Middle East, South Asia, East Asia, and Southeast Asia. We compared patient demographics, liver dysfunction, and tumor burden by region. We compared overall survival by region using Kaplan-Meier analysis and identified factors associated with survival using multivariable Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: Among 8796 patients with advanced fibrosis or cirrhosis who achieved SVR, 583 (6.6%) developed incident HCC. There was marked regional variation in the proportion of patients detected by surveillance (range: 59.5%-100%), median maximum tumor diameter (range, 1.8-5.0 cm), and the proportion with multinodular HCC (range, 15.4%-60.8%). The prognosis of patients highly varied by region (hazard ratio range, 1.82-9.92), with the highest survival rates in East Asia, North America, and South America, and the lowest survival rates in the Middle East and South Asia. After adjusting for geographic region, HCC surveillance was associated with early stage detection (Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage 0/A, 71.0% vs 21.3%; P < .0001) and lower mortality rates (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.18-0.46). CONCLUSIONS: Clinical characteristics, including early stage detection, and prognosis of post-SVR HCC differed significantly across geographic regions. Surveillance utilization appears to be a high-yield intervention target to improve prognosis among patients with post-SVR HCC globally.

Neighborhood-level social determinants of health measures independently predict receipt of living donor liver transplantation in the United States.

Disparities exist in the access to living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) in the United States. However, the association of neighborhood-level social determinants of health (SDoH) on the receipt of LDLT is not well-established. This was a retrospective cohort study of adult liver transplant recipients between January 1, 2005 and December 31, 2021 at centers performing LDLT using the United Network for Organ Sharing database, which was linked through patients' ZIP code to a set of 24 neighborhood-level SDoH measures from different data sources. Temporal trends and center differences in neighborhood Social Deprivation Index (SDI), a validated scale of socioeconomic deprivation ranging from 0 to 100 (0=least disadvantaged), were assessed by transplant type. Multivariable logistic regression evaluated the association of increasing SDI on receipt of LDLT [vs. deceased donor liver transplantation (DDLT)]. There were 51,721 DDLT and 4026 LDLT recipients at 59 LDLT-performing centers during the study period. Of the 24 neighborhood-level SDoH measures studied, the SDI was most different between the 2 transplant types, with LDLT recipients having lower SDI (ie, less socioeconomic disadvantage) than DDLT recipients (median SDI 37 vs. 47; p < 0.001). The median difference in SDI between the LDLT and DDLT groups significantly decreased from 13 in 2005 to 3 in 2021 ( p = 0.003). In the final model, the SDI quintile was independently associated with transplant type ( p < 0.001) with a threshold SDI of ~40, above which increasing SDI was significantly associated with reduced odds of LDLT (vs. reference SDI 1-20). As a neighborhood-level SDoH measure, SDI is useful for evaluating disparities in the context of LDLT. Center outreach efforts that aim to reduce disparities in LDLT could preferentially target US ZIP codes with SDI > 40.

Impact of Older Donor Age on Recipient and Graft Survival After LDLT: The US Experience.

BACKGROUND: The impact of selecting older donors for living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) in the United States is incompletely studied, particularly in light of the recent expansion of LDLT nationally. METHODS: Adult LDLTs from January 01, 2005 to December 31, 2019 were identified using the United Network for Organ Sharing database. Multivariable Cox models evaluated living donor (LD) age as a predictor of LDLT recipient and graft survival. The impact of increasing donor age on recipient outcomes was compared between LD and deceased donor recipients. Donor postoperative outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS: There were 3539 LDLTs at 65 transplant centers during the study period. Despite the recent expansion of LDLT, the proportion of LDs aged ≥50 y was stable. There were no clinically significant differences in recipient or donor characteristics by LD age group. LD age ≥50 y was associated with an adjusted hazard ratio of 1.49 ( P = 0.012) for recipient survival and 1.61 ( P < 0.001) for graft survival (vs LDs aged 18-29 y). The negative impact of increasing donor age on graft survival was more profound after LDLT than deceased donor liver transplantation (interaction P = 0.019). There was a possible increased rate of early donor biliary complications for donors >55 y (7.1% versus 3.1% for age <40 y; P = 0.156). CONCLUSIONS: Increasing LD age is associated with decreased recipient and graft survival, although older donors still largely yield acceptable outcomes. Donor outcomes were not clearly impacted by increasing age, though this warrants further study.

Clinical outcomes of patients with Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System 3 or Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System 4 observations in patients with cirrhosis: A systematic review.

Patients with indeterminate liver nodules, classified as LR-3 and LR-4 observations per the Liver Imaging Reporting and Data System, are at risk of developing hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), but risk estimates remain imprecise. We conducted a systematic review of Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases from inception to December 2021 to identify cohort studies examining HCC incidence among patients with LR-3 or LR-4 observations on computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Predictors of HCC were abstracted from each study, when available. Of 13 total studies, nine conducted LR-3 observation-level analyses, with the proportions of incident HCC ranging from 1.2% to 12.5% at 12 months and 4.2% to 44.4% during longer study follow-up. Among three studies with patient-level analyses, 8%-22.2% of patients with LR-3 lesions developed LR-4 observations and 11.1%-24.5% developed HCC. Among nine studies conducting LR-4 observation-level analyses, incident HCC ranged from 30.8% to 44.0% at 12 months and 30.9% to 71.0% during study follow-up; conversely, 6%-42% of observations were downgraded to LR-3 or lower. Patient-level factors associated with HCC included older age, male sex, higher alpha-fetoprotein levels, viral etiology, and prior history of HCC; observation-level factors included maximum diameter, threshold growth, T2 hyperintensity, and visibility on ultrasound. Studies were limited by small sample sizes, inclusion of patients with prior HCC, short follow-up duration, and failure to account for clustering of observations in patients or competing risks of transplantation and death. LR-3 and LR-4 observations have elevated but variable risks of HCC. Higher quality studies are necessary to identify high-risk patients who warrant close CT or MRI-based follow-up.

Center Variability in Acute Rejection and Biliary Complications After Pediatric Liver Transplantation.

Transplant center performance and practice variation for pediatric post-liver transplantation (LT) outcomes other than survival are understudied. This was a retrospective cohort study of pediatric LT recipients who received transplants between January 1, 2006, and May 31, 2017, using United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) data that were merged with the Pediatric Health Information System database. Center effects for the acute rejection rate at 1 year after LT (AR1) using UNOS coding and the biliary complication rate at 1 year after LT (BC1) using inpatient billing claims data were estimated by center-specific rescaled odds ratios that accounted for potential differences in recipient and donor characteristics. There were 2216 pediatric LT recipients at 24 freestanding children's hospitals in the United States during the study period. The median unadjusted center rate of AR1 was 36.92% (interquartile range [IQR], 22.36%-44.52%), whereas that of BC1 was 32.29% (IQR, 26.14%-40.44%). Accounting for recipient case mix and donor factors, 5/24 centers performed better than expected with regard to AR1, whereas 3/24 centers performed worse than expected. There was less heterogeneity across the center effects for BC1 than for AR1. There was no relationship observed between the center effects for AR1 or BC1 and center volume. Beyond recipient and allograft factors, differences in transplant center management are an important driver of center AR1 performance, and less so of BC1 performance. Further research is needed to identify the sources of variability so as to implement the most effective solutions to broadly enhance outcomes for pediatric LT recipients.

Survival Benefit of Liver Transplantation for Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: In the United States, nearly 30% of liver transplants (LT) are performed for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Although overall long-term survival is highest with LT, there are limited data on the incremental survival benefit of LT versus other curative options (resection or ablation) due to shunting of patients towards LT. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients aged 50-69 with cirrhosis and HCC in the Veterans Health Administration (population enriched with 3 curative treatments) from 2008 to 2016. The cohort was restricted to patients who received LT, resection, or ablation and a calculated model for end-stage liver disease score <15 at HCC diagnosis. RESULTS: Among 2129 veterans in the analytic cohort, 658 (26.7%) received LT, 244 (11.5%) underwent resection, and 1317 (61.59%) received ablation. In multivariable models, patients who underwent resection (hazard ratio: 5.42; 95% confidence interval: 4.15-7.08) or ablation (hazard ratio: 5.50; 95% confidence interval: 4.51-6.71) had significantly increased hazards of death. However, in absolute terms, the incremental survival benefit of LT over resection or ablation was small, between 0.02 and 0.03 years at 1 year, 0.32-0.42 years at 3 years, and 1.04-1.24 years at 5 years follow-up. These results were consistent in sensitivity analyses accounting for possible immortal time bias, as well as a cohort restricted to early/intermediate stage HCC. CONCLUSIONS: Although LT is associated with significantly increased survival compared to resection and ablation, the absolute incremental survival benefit is small over a 5-year time horizon. Optimal selection of patients for LT is critical for maximizing utilization of a scarce resource.

Effect of Financial Incentives on Patient Use of Mailed Colorectal Cancer Screening Tests: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Mailing fecal immunochemical test (FIT) kits to patients' homes has been shown to boost colorectal cancer screening rates, but response rates remain limited, and organized programs typically require repeated outreach attempts. Behavioral economics has shown that offering salient financial incentives to patients may increase participation in preventive health. Objective: To compare the impact of different financial incentives for mailed FIT outreach. Design, Setting, and Participants: This 4-parallel-arm randomized clinical trial included patients aged 50 to 75 years who had an established primary care clinician, at least 2 visits in the prior 2 years, and were eligible for colorectal cancer screening and not up-to-date. This study was conducted at urban primary care practices at an academic health system from December 2015 to February 2018. Data analysis was conducted from March 2018 to September 2018. Interventions: Eligible patients received a letter from their primary care clinician that included a mailed FIT kit and instructions for use. They were randomized in a 1:1:1:1 ratio to receive (1) no financial incentive; (2) an unconditional $10 incentive included with the mailing; (3) a $10 incentive conditional on FIT completion; or (4) a conditional lottery with a 1-in-10 chance of winning $100 after FIT completion. Main Outcomes and Measures: Fecal immunochemical test completion within 2 and 6 months of initial outreach. Results: A total of 897 participants were randomized, with a median age of 57 years (interquartile range, 52-62 years); 56% were women, and 69% were black. The overall completion rate across all arms was 23.5% at 2 months. The completion rate at 2 months was 26.0% (95% CI, 20.4%-32.3%) in the no incentive arm, 27.2% (95% CI, 21.5%-33.6%) in the unconditional incentive arm, 23.2% (95% CI, 17.9%-29.3%) in the conditional incentive arm, and 17.7% (95% CI, 13.0%-23.3%) in the lottery incentive arm. None of the arms with an incentive were statistically superior to the arm without incentive. The overall FIT completion rate across all arms was 28.9% at 6 months, and there was also no difference by arm. The completion rate at 6 months was 32.7% (95% CI, 26.6%-39.3%) in the no incentive arm, 31.7% (95% CI, 25.7%-38.2%) in the unconditional incentive arm, 26.8% (95% CI, 21.1%-33.1%) in the conditional incentive arm, and 24.3% (95% CI, 18.9%-30.5%) in the lottery incentive arm. Conclusions and Relevance: Mailed FIT resulted in high colorectal cancer screening response rates in this population, but different forms of financial incentives of the same expected value ($10) did not incrementally increase FIT completion rates. The incentive value may have been too small or financial incentives may not be effective in this context. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02594150.